Seriously, though, I have been giving some thought to how best to write Latin. Part of me likes the rigorous simplicity of Oxford's current approach – mandatory use of macrons over long vowels (like in Lavian, or romaji), and uniform use of u and i along with upper-case V and I. But there's another part of me that does prefer to mark consonantal v and j. Take a name like Gaius, which is generally thought to have been trisyllabic: in Oxford's style we'd have to use Gāïus (Gāïī, Gāïō, etc.) to get this across unambiguously, whereas if we're using j, Gāius will suffice. The point is often made that the Romans didn't distinguish v, j from u, i, but by that logic we'd have to abandon two-case writing as well as modern spacing and punctuation. (There's also a compromise style frequently used these days, with v but not j, but I find that less appealing – and harder to justify – than either of the alternatives.)

So my preference right now is to use mandatory macrons, and to use both v and j. This approach might seem like a mix of new and old practice, but it's consistent in showing as much phonological information as possible.

Interestingly, the Romanian and Sardinian forms show the (typologically rather common) change of a labialized velar or velar-labiovelar sequence into a labial, the same process which at a much earlier time transformed PIE *éḱwos into Greek híppos. Something similar also took place in Latin, changing OL duellom, duonos, duis into CL bellum, bonus, bis.

2. A notable quality of the PIE words *mātḗr "mother" and *pǝtḗr "father" is that they don't rhyme: you can see this in English, and in Latin māter, pater. But as best I can tell, Portuguese, with mãe, pai, is the only Romance language which has preserved these roots in non-rhyming form. All the others seem to have either merged their vowels to make them rhyme or replaced them with different roots:

So I've been told "per disciplinum mea lux videbis" is grammatically incorrect. The chap managed to translate it correctly ("through my teachings you will see the light"), but said about how it was so syntactically and grammatically wrong it might as well have said 'someone called Romanus they go the house'.

Anyone got a better translation for "by/through my teachings, you will see the light"?

Yeah, "disciplina" is first declension, and "per" takes the accusative, so it's definitely "per disciplinam." The possessive adjective "meus/-a/-um" has to agree with the noun it is modifying ("discliplinam"), so it also needs the feminine accusative singular form, "meam." And "lux" is the nominative, but you want it to be the direct object of the verb, so again you need the accusative "lucem." The ending for "videbis" is correct, though.

Remember that in Latin, you don't just need to conjugate the verbs; you also have to decline the nouns, pronouns, and adjectives. Incidentally, Google Translate seems somehow utterly incapable of translating into or out of Latin, except translating the meanings of the stems, as if it ignores the inflected endings entirely.